Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36074520›Full record

ArticleAngewandte Chemie (International ed. in English)2022

Algorithmic Explorations of Unimolecular and Bimolecular Reaction Spaces.

Qiyuan Zhao, Brett M Savoie

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Angewandte Chemie (International ed. in English), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Reaction Enumeration Based on NBO-Informed Molecular Graphs.Journal of computational chemistry · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Reactant Discovery with anACS earth & space chemistry · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. ΔChemical science · 2023
    Article
  12. Deep reaction network exploration of glucose pyrolysis.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Algorithmic Explorations of Unimolecular and Bimolecular Reaction Spaces.Angewandte Chemie (International ed. in English) · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Qiyuan ZhaoDavidson School of Chemical Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, 47906, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3228-8160
Brett M SavoieDavidson School of Chemical Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, 47906, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7039-4039

Funding

Office of Naval Research N00014-21-1-2476
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Algorithmic reaction exploration based on transition state searches has already made inroads into many niche applications, but its potential as a general-purpose tool is still largely unrealized. Computational cost and the absence of benchmark problems involving larger molecules remain obstacles to further progress. Here an ultra-low cost exploration algorithm is implemented and used to explore the reactivity of unimolecular and bimolecular reactants, comprising a total of 581 reactions involving 51 distinct reactants. The algorithm discovers all established reaction pathways, where such comparisons are possible, while also revealing a much richer reactivity landscape, including lower barrier reaction pathways and a strong dependence of reaction conformation in the apparent barriers of the reported reactions. The diversity of these benchmarks illustrate that reaction exploration algorithms are approaching general-purpose capability.

Indexed as

Automated Reaction PredictionConformational SamplingReaction MechanismsReaction NetworksTransition States

Identifiers

PMID36074520
PMCPMC9827825

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.